Doonesbury's Trudeau: Despicable and Degrading

Via Newsbusters: So what are the qualifications of a woman to become President of the US? According to liberal cartoonist Gary Trudeau, the ability to “fill out a tight sweater” is among them. Well, actually, only if you are a conservative woman candidate. Witness his hilarious Doonesbury cartoon above. Wonder if NOW will have a comment? Not holding my breath…
This is demeaning to women but comes as no surprise from this pathetic man. When you can’t argue the facts, guess making a “cartoon” about a conservative woman candidate and her chest size is about all you got.
Want to let them know what you think of this “strip”? Send them an email here at their contact page. Heads up though, at their contact page is this little bit of information: “Everyone, including psycho flamers out to trash the culture by lowering the standards of social interaction, must enter a valid e-mail address to correspond with Doonesbury.com.”
I sent an email indicating that I was a woman and don’t consider myself a psycho flamer. I also thought his “strip” was the type of “art” that trashes culture and lowers the standards of “professionalism”. Boy, his parents must be proud.
h/t Noel Sheppard
DCG

0 responses to “Doonesbury's Trudeau: Despicable and Degrading”

I stopped reading Doonesbury at least 10 years ago. Gary Trudeau must be getting desperate. His wife, newswoman Jane Pauley, must be so proud! (Gosh, do you think Pauley, now 60 years old, still fills out a sweater?)

Very interesting facts on two very different ladies.
Sarah Palin
Whether you’re a Democrat, Independent or Republican … the second half of this e-mail should make all of us very sick. Send this on … especially the second half.
READ TO THE VERY END! VERY ENLIGHTENING AND VERY DISTURBING!
By Dewie Whetsell,
Alaskan fisherman
As posted in comments on Greta’s article referencing the MOVEON ad about Sarah Palin.
The last 45 of my 66 years I’ve spent in a commercial fishing town in Alaska. I under-stand Alaska politics but never understood national politics well until this last year. Here’s the breaking point: Neither side of the Palin controversy gets it. It’s not about persona, style, rhetoric — it’s about doing things. Even Palin supporters never mention the things that I’m about to mention here.
1. Democrats forget when Palin was the darling of the Democrats, because as soon as Palin took the governor’s office away from a fellow Republican and tough SOB, Frank Murkowski, she tore into the Republicans’ “Corrupt Bastards Club” (CBC) and sent them packing. Many of them are now residing in state housing and wearing orange jump suits The Democrats reacted by skipping around the yard, throwing confetti and singing, “la la la la” (well, you know how they are). Name another governor in this country that has ever done anything similar.
2. Now with the CBC gone, there were fewer Alaskan politicians to protect the huge, giant oil companies here. So she constructed and enacted a new system of splitting the oil profits called “ACES.” Exxon (the biggest corporation in the world) protested and Sarah told them, “Don’t let the door hit you in the stern on your way out.” They stayed, and Alaska residents went from being merely wealthy to being filthy rich. Of course, the other huge international oil companies meekly fell in line. Again, give me the name of any other governor in the country that has done anything similar.
3. The other thing she did when she walked into the governor’s office is she got the list of state requests for federal funding for projects, known as “pork.” She went through the list, took 85% of them and placed them in the “when-hell-freezes-over” stack. She let locals know that if we need something built, we’ll pay for it ourselves. Maybe she figured she could use the money she got from selling the previous governor’s jet because it was extravagant. Maybe she could use the money she saved by dismissing the governor’s cook (remarking that she could cook for her own family), giving back the state vehicle issued to her, maintaining that she already had a car, and dismissing her state-provided security force (never mentioning — I imagine — that she’s packing heat herself). I’m still waiting to hear the names of those other governors.
4. Now, even with her much-ridiculed “gosh and golly” mannerism, she also managed to put together a totally new approach to get-ting a natural gas pipeline built which will be the biggest private construction project in the history of North America. No one else could do it, although they tried. If that doesn’t impress you, then you’re trying too hard to be unimpressed while watching her do things like this while baking up a batch of brownies with her other hand.
5. For 30 years, Exxon held a lease to do exploratory drilling at a place called Point Thompson. They made excuses the entire time why they couldn’t start drilling. In truth they were holding it like an investment. No governor for 30 years could make them get started. Then, she told them she was revoking their lease and kicking them out. They protested and threatened court action. She shrugged and reminded them that she knew the way to the courthouse.Alaska won again.
6. President Obama wants the nation to be on 25% renewable resources for electricity by 2025. Sarah went to the legislature and submitted her plan for Alaska to be at 50% renewable by 2025. We are already at 25%. I can give you more specifics about things done, as opposed to style and persona. Everybody wants to be cool, sound cool, look cool. But that’s just a coverup. I’m still waiting to hear from liberals the names of other governors who can match what mine has done in two and a half years. I won’t be holding my breath.
By the way, she was content to return to Alaska after the national election and go to work, but the haters wouldn’t let her. Now these adolescent screechers are obviously not scuba divers. And no one ever told them what happens when you continually jab and pester a barracuda. Without warning, it will spin around and tear your face off. Shoulda known better.
You have just read the truth about Sarah Palin that sends the media, along with the Democrats, into a wild uncontrolled frenzy to discredit her.
I guess they are only interested in skirt chasers, dishonesty, immoral people, liars, womanizers, murderers and bitter ex-presidents’ wives.
So, “You go, Girl.” I only wish the men in Washington had your guts, determination, honesty and morals. I rest my case. Only FOOLS listen to the biased media.
The establishment politicians, both DemocRAT and RepubliCON-MEN, are scared she’ll get elected, and some of them could end up in jail.

here’s the rest of theabove piece. this is the disturbing part
NOW, if you’ve read this far … now, open your eyes …
First Lady Michelle Obama’s servant list and pay scale
The First Lady requires more than 20 attendants (that’s 22 attendants to be exact).
1. $172,200 – Sher, Susan (chief of staff) 2. $140,000 – Frye, Jocelyn C. (Deputy Assistant to the president and director of policy and projects for the First Lady)
3. $113,000 – Rogers, Desiree G. (special assistant to the president and White House social secretary)
4. $102,000 – Johnston, Camille Y. (special assistant to the president and director of communications for the First Lady)
5. $100,000 – Winter, Melissa E. (special assistant to the president and deputy chief of staff to the First Lady)
6. $90,000 – Medina, David S. (deputy chief of staff to the First Lady)
7. $84,000 – Lelyveld, Catherine M. (director and press secretary to the First Lady)
8. $75,000 – Starkey, Frances M. (director of scheduling and advance for the First Lady)
9. $70,000 – Sanders, Trooper (deputy director of policy and projects for the First Lady)
10. $65,000 – Burnough, Erinn J. (deputy director and deputy social secretary)
11. $64,000 – Reinstein, Joseph B. (deputy director and deputy social secretary)
12. $62,000 – Goodman, Jennifer R. (deputy director of scheduling and events coordinator for the First Lady)
13. $60,000 – Fitts, Alan O. (deputy director of advance and trip director for the First Lady)
14. $57,500 – Lewis, Dana M. (special assistant and personal aide to the First Lady)
15. $52,500 – Mustaphi, Semonti M. (associate director and deputy press secretary to the First Lady)
16. $50,000 – Jarvis, Kristen E. (special assistant for scheduling and traveling aide to the First Lady)
17. $45,000 – Lechtenberg, Tyler A. (associate director of correspondence for the First Lady)
18. $43,000 – Tubman, Samantha (deputy associate director, social office)
19. $40,000 – Boswell, Joseph J. (executive assistant to the chief of staff to the First Lady)
20. $36,000 – Armbruster, Sally M. (staff assistant to the social secretary)
21. $35,000 – Bookey, Natalie (staff assistant)
22. $35,000 – Jackson, Deilia A. (deputy associate director of correspondence for the First Lady) (This is community organizing at its finest.)
There has NEVER been anyone in the White House at any time who has created such an army of staffers whose sole duties are the facilitation of the First Lady’s social life. One wonders why she needs so much help, at taxpayer expense, when even Hillary Clinton only had three, Jackie Kennedy one, Laura Bush one and, prior to Mamie Eisenhower, social help came from the president’s own pocket.
Note: This does not include makeup artist Ingrid Grimes-Miles, 49, and “First Hairstylist” Johnny Wright, 31, both of whom traveled aboard Air Force One to Europe.
FRIENDS, THESE SALARIES ADD UP TO SIX MILLION, THREE HUNDRED SIXTY FOUR THOUSAND DOLLARS ($6,364,000) FOR THE FOUR YEARS OF OFFICE?
AND WE ARE IN A RECESSION???
WELL, MOST OF US ARE.
I GUESS IT’S OK TO SPEND WILDLY WHEN IT’S NOT YOUR OWN MONEY?
Copyright 2009 CanadaFreePress.Com https://canadafreepress..com/
Yes, yes, I know, The Canadian Free Press has to publish this because the USA media is too scared they might be considered racist.
Sorry USA!
Please pass this on.
——————————————————————————–

To conclude my contribution above, let me say …..Mrs. Bachmann is also an accomplished tough operator in her own right. Both Palin and Bachmann make MIchelle Obama look like a piker. What has she ever done? NOTHING

Linda,
I think you forgot to mention that Michelle O. was mandated by the courts to forfeit her law license. That is one of her accomplishments that the MSM never mentions!
Michele B. on the other hand was a successful tax litigator.
Sarah P. would be wonderful on an energy council to support energy independence. She knows oil and natural gas!

I hope everyone e-mails Trudeau directly, as I did. We must start shoving back everywhere we can. I realize that what he did was the usual Liberal/Progressive trash that these people shovel daily, but it is getting old and stale, like Barack Obama’s speeches. How could someone who never held a job before figure out how to put millions to work? I don’t consider Baskin-Robbins a job, because you don’t have to make any decisions.

This strip has nothing to do with having a female president or not. It has everything to do with a president who is simply a windbag. is it sexist and offensive? Probably, but not much in humor doesn’t tread on somebody… BTW, the story on the Obama’s law licenses is just so much BS. There are plenty of real issues to talk about instead of this constant fabrication of misinformation and outright falsehoods. Doesn’t the right think there is enough reality out there to create a swing of voters, or is this just smear politics, or in other words, if we smear enough we can divert attention from our own pathetic candidates. The truth is that whoever we elect won’t be able to do anything more than is already being done. They will just get a nice federal paycheck for life.

As a woman, I can tell you it is offensive. Trust me, I’m a blonde and can take a lot of jokes about dumb blondes. To think this “humor” would apply to liberal woman is highly delusional.
Please provide evidence of constant fabrication, misinformation and outright falsehoods that you might find here. We don’t do that kind of blogging at FOTM.
Smear enough to divert attention from our own pathetic candidates? You must be talking about Hoffa and his smear of the TEA party.

BTW Linda,
Your numbers at the bottom of that note about staff are also grossly wrong. Laura Bush had between 24 and 26 staff members, Jackie Kennedy Onassis had 40, and others were all significantly more than your “horror of horrors” letter would lead us to believe. Does anyone really believe this crap?

Mapsguy, please provide proof of the numbers you spew. Maybe then I’ll believe your crap.
These numbers for Michelle’s staff are accurate, as they have been previously posted on this website. Go ahead, take a look.

You should go back to the Lord of the Rings, Eowyn. I don’t know where you get your information from but if you go to Snopes or Factcheck.org you will discover that the numbers you are stating are nothing but some idiot venting and sending out a letter to rabid people that will believe anything they read. I would hope that you, a Middle Earth MD, would be the last one to get sucked into something so ridiculously implausible.

My namesake, Eowyn, is a noble woman of Rohan. So I do thank you for correcting me. I’ve gone back to my original post, “Queen Michelle’s $1.2M Staff,” and added an Update on the staff of previous First Ladies. Alas, my Update ain’t gonna bolster your case because the number of Michelle Obama’s assistants has now burgeoned to 25, not 22. That comes straight from the mouth of Catherine McCormick-Lelyveld, a spokeswoman for Michelle Obama. McCormick told PolitiFact.com that Michelle Obama’s staff is now closer to 25 people.

I hate to tell you there, comrade, but Factcheck.org is a lefty site that specializes in pro-democrat Bravo Sierra propaganda.
We over at NewsBusters.org blew the lid off that worthless site years ago, as they were exposed for all to see as just another collection of lefty hacks.
If you want respect around here, you are going to have to do much better than that.
-Dave

University of Pennsylvania, arguably one of the top universities in the country, is where factcheck.org comes from. It is NON PARTISAN and has had numerous stories debunking Democrat claims as well as Republican claims. If you are suggesting that what they present is purposefully slanted to the progressive/liberal/Democratic side than your ability to process rational data is sadly lacking. The internet creates an opportunity for anyone to present anything as fact, regardless of its basis, and there are always going to be conspiracy theorists and other gullible people who will believe anything that furthers their cause and reinforces their positions, whoever shaky the ground is around that position.
This thing with staffing doesn’t even make sense (not the FACT about Michelle Obama’s staff, that is correct). What is wrong is the comparison and the staffing numbers. I don’t have to agree with the point, if that had been primary, which it WASN’T, that that kind of staff is overkill, just like it was with Laura Bush etc. If the conservative movement wants to make a difference, they should stop looking at these red herrings and start coming up with solutions that address the entirety of the problems we face, instead of the just bits and pieces that sound good but don’t pass the muster of actually making a difference in solving the long term challenges that we face in a society of different cultures and beliefs.
In other words, what worked in 1776 just might not work in 2011. The playing field is different. The Tea Party premises sound good until you delve below the surface and sound bytes. They do not offer solutions for long term international economies and sustainability. This machine is completely fired up on rhetoric and emotion, which frankly, is easy to do when things are tough. The glue will be what is under the passion. It is why it is unlikely that it will last; Americans have a notoriously short attention span and the same lack of desire to go DEEP beyond the hype. The FACT is that a totally consumption based society is NOT sustainable in the long run without major changes in the way we do business and interact with our neighbors, physically and rhetorically. We have a lot of problems. Are there easy solutions? Of course not, but basing arguments on flimsy foundations won’t help us solve anything that enables us to move forward as a strong society.

So how many TEA party rallies have you been to? How many TEA party web sites have you visited? How many TEA party meetings you been to? Bet if you’ve done any of this you would know that it is not merely rhetoric and there are proposed solutions. But just keep bashing what you don’t know anything about.
Guess that $300 BILLION Porkulus II that Skippy is proposing will definitely solve the international economies and sustain us through 2012 /sarc

Mapsguy:
Others have rebutted points made by you in your comment, so I’ll just address this one claim you made: “University of Pennsylvania, arguably one of the top universities in the country, is where factcheck.org comes from. It is NON PARTISAN.”
Are you that naive?Just because an organization claims to be non-partisan doesn’t mean it is.

1. That FactCheck.org operates out of the U. of Pennsylvania means squat. I’m an academic (Ph.D. from U.C. Berkeley; Full Professor) and I know only too well how politically partisan academics are. But don’t take my word for it. There are plentiful survey data on the vast majority of U.S. professors being registered Democrats. Profs at Ivy League colleges/universities are even more so.2. FactCheck.org is funded by the Annenberg Foundation — a Foundation with which unrepentant domestic terrorist Bill Ayers as well as Barack Obama have ties. Ayers founded the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, then got his pal Barack Obama to be its Board Chairman and President.3. The Annenberg Foundation is described by Wikipedia as “expanding to include environmental stewardship, social justice, and animal welfare”. While I myself care about the environment (I’ve been recycling my tin, paper, and plastics for 30 years) and animals (my current rescued critters include a cat and 3 birds), we both know “environmental stewardship, social justice, and animal welfare” are all code words for left wing causes.
Please leave academics, self-proclaimed “nonpartisan” factcheckers, and foundations to those more experienced and knowledgeable. I’ll overlook your naivete, given your post-HS education consists of a stint at a community college.

I guess this is just another place for partisan hacks that couldn’t see the truth if it was slapping you in the face… Yep… my education at schools that you probably wouldn’t even be considered for and the FACT that I didn’t finish college is a factor here. Just a little old vet here that could care less… What you don’t have is common sense. Kill the old USA… It is absolutely what the tea party is going to do if given the chance.
Penn is bad? Hmmm… Wharton is bad… just training a bunch of dummies. I hate to say it, but the problem with us, is you and the other blind lemmings that get ALL of their information from redacted and hyper-inflated sources, and from partisan blowhards with BIG financial dreams. Eowyn… queen of the misinformed… sorry. You don’t seem dumbed down… Why don’t you take the blinders off and look at the whole picture instead of just believing what someone with an agenda that you don’t know tells you.
I have no agenda here, I just care about this country and was willing to wear the uniform, which is probably more than you did… What is being put out as fact is venomous misinformation meant only to minimize people that are trying to move this country forward and solve problems started by others. Granted, they could do better, but character assassination and conspiracy theory is only going to create more problems. Keep your hatred and vitriol to yourself. It isn’t becoming to any of us and has no place in a civilized discourse.

Yeah, we’re partisan, duh (Conservatives who love America)….but we do provide facts for our blog posts.
So you call us names, blind lemmings, etc. and assume that some here have never served or supported family members that served (and you’re wrong on that assumption). How convenient that you completely ignore the facts Eowyn presented to you about factcheck.org. But not surprise you pull an Alinsky. When you can’t argue the facts, just attack the target.

“partisan hacks that couldn’t see the truth if it was slapping you in the face”
“What you don’t have is common sense. Kill the old USA”
“you and the other blind lemmings”
“Eowyn… queen of the misinformed”
“venomous misinformation”
“character assassination and conspiracy theory”

Then you accuse us of “hatred and vitriol” !!! LOL
Are you always this transparently projection-prone? Really, you make it too easy….
But I do have to point out one HUGE contradiction in your comment:
1. You write: “my education at schools that you probably wouldn’t even be considered for”
2. But then, in the same breath, you admit “I didn’t finish college”
So, which is it? You got educated at schools you think I wouldn’t even be considered for, but then you “didn’t finish college”. Why’s that?
As for that “school” for which you say I “wouldn’t even be considered,” would that be DeKalb Community College? Since I have a Ph.D. (and an M.A. & a B.A.) from the University of California, Berkeley, you think DeKalb is just too high falutin for me? Are you always this hilarious?